OUMA OKECHI OKOTE SHIDA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA MUSOMA SUB-REGISTRY AT MUSOMA CRIMINAL SESSION CASE NO. 000018370 OF 2024 THE REPUBLIC VERSUS OUMA OKECHI OKOTE@ SHIDA RULING ON SENTENCE 05/03/2025 & 26/03/2025 Kafanabo, J.: On 05/03/2025, the information for the offence of Acts Intended to Cause Grievous Harm contrary to section 222(a) of the Penal Code, Cap. 16 R.E. 2022 (hereinafter the 'Penal Code') was read over to Ouma Okechi Okote @Shida (hereinafter referred to as the accused). The particulars of the information were clear that the accused on the 24th day of September 2023, at Maburi Village within the Serengeti District in the Mara Region, with intent to disable, unlawfully caused grievous harm to Silaus Odira @Kuni (hereinafter 'the victim'). The accused, unambiguously, pleaded guilty to the said information. The accused also admitted that all the facts read to him, expounding on how and when the offence was committed, were true. The prosecution also tendered a certificate of seizure (admitted as exhibit 'Pl'), a machete used to commit a crime (admitted as exhibit 'P2'), a medical examination report (PF3) of the victim (admitted as exhibit'P3') and a sketch map of the crime scene which was admitted as exhibit 'P4'. i Following his own unequivocal plea of guilty, this Court convicted the accused for the offence of Acts Intended to Cause Grievous Harm contrary to section 222(a) of the Penal Code. Having convicted the accused, this Court is required to determine an appropriate sentence for the offence committed. Therefore, the Court invited counsels representing both parties to address the Court on matters they consider relevant and that will be suitable for the sentencing of the accused. The learned counsels diligently made their submissions for their respective cases. Therefore, this Court is required to determine an appropriate sentence for the offence committed by the accused. The relevant law on sentencing the accused is found in section 222(a) of the Penal Code which provides that: "Any person who, with intent to maim, disfigure or disable any person or to do some grievous harm to any person or to resist or prevent the lawful arrest or detention of any person- (a)unlawfully wounds or does any grievous harm to any person by any means whatsoever; (b-g)-N/A is guilty of an offence, and liable to imprisonment for life." The above section provides a punishment of life imprisonment for a person who is convicted of the offence of Acts Intended to Cause Grievous Harm. Life imprisonment is the maximum sentence set by the law, but not a mandatory sentence to be imposed on a convict. The Court upon thoughtful and prudent consideration, bearing in mind the circumstances and facts of 2 each particular case, also depending on the nature and gravity of the offence, may exercise its discretion and impose a reasonable sentence on the convict. The facts of the case as presented by the prosecution and admitted by the accused indicate that on the 24th day of September 2023 at Maburi Village, in the Serengeti District, in the Mara Region at around 16:00 hrs., the victim in this case went to a traditional liquor bar together with his friend named Mnanka Sangi and they met other people from their village. They joined the drink, and shortly thereafter the accused arrived and sat beside them and he ordered his drink, and they all continued to drink liquor. Then Mnanka Sangi and the accused started arguing and an altercation arose between them, and the accused unleashed a machete which he had placed on garments around his waist. The victim tried to intervene and mediate the situation but failed and upon seeing a Machete Mnanka Sangi fled the crime scene. The accused then turned to the victim and attacked him by slashing him on different parts of his body. The accused person lacerated the victim on his arm resulting in a complete amputation of the victim's hand of the right arm. He also slashed the victim on the left side of the head around the ear and fled, but shortly afterwards he was apprehended by an angry mob. The fact that the victim was gravely injured is supported by a PF3 (a medical examination report) of the victim dated 24th September 2023 which was admitted by this court as exhibit P3. The report indicates that the victim had multiple cut wounds on the head, face and right arm. It is also indicated that the wounds caused permanent disablement of the right upper limb. The 3 medical report also indicates that the wound was caused by a sharp object and amounted to maiming. The said details of the report coupled with the facts of the case admitted by the accused, make it crystal clear that the convict fatally wounded the victim by using a sharp and dangerous object, the machete. The said facts establish the viciousness of the offence committed by the accused. As regards the aggravating factors in sentencing the accused, the prosecution, submitted that the accused be punished according to law. It was also submitted that the Court, in imposing punishment against the accused, should consider various factors illustrated below. One, the offence was committed against the victim who was kind enough to try to mediate the accused and Mnanka Sangi who were quarrelling. Two, the accused used a dangerous weapon (a machete), with a sharp edge and slashed the victim in vulnerable parts of the body including the head, stomach and hands. Three, the right hand of the victim was completely amputated. Four, the victim was also attacked on the ear and is suffering from poor and/or loss of hearing. Further, the amputation of the victim's hand incapacitated the victim who is the father of the two children (one aged 10 and another aged 6). He was the bread earner of the family working as a welder and the amputation of the victim's hand incapacitated him, turned him into a beggar and dependent unable to implement his duties as he used to do. It was also prayed that a stern punishment be imposed on the accused so that it can be a lesson to the people of Mara Region who make unlawful 4 and dangerous conduct as acceptable act, which is erroneous. Moreover, it was argued that the accused also did not show remorse towards the victim as he fled the crime scene and did not offer any help to the victim. The prosecution also prayed for compensation of the victim for the injury suffered, the costs he incurred in medical treatment and for the incapacitation caused. The Republic also laid bare that it has no previous criminal record of the accused, but it is the prayer of the prosecution that desen/ing punishment be imposed on the accused. In mitigation, Ms. Joachim, the learned advocate submitted that the accused deserves a lenient sentence/punishment for various reasons. She submitted that the offence was committed in an altercation involving the accused and Mnanka Sangi, in a bar where the accused and others were drunk and they were seeking to take possession of the Machete but unfortunately, the victim's hand was amputated. The accused pleaded guilty to the offence demonstrating his remorsefulness. The accused cooperated with the investigation authorities as he confessed to committing the offence before the police on 25/09/2023 and thus served the time and resources of the relevant authorities. The Court was also urged to consider that the accused is the 1st offender. The learned counsel also submitted that the accused has been in remand for one year and six months since his arrest on 24/09/2023. The accused is just forty (40) years of age he is a workforce for the nation and a father of four young children deserted by their mother and thus a bread earner of the family. The accused's health is unstable because following the 5 incident which landed him in this Court, he was also attacked by an angry crowd of people and thus seriously injured in various parts of his body. After reviewing the above submissions, the law with respect to the punishment for the commission of offence of Acts Intended to Cause Grievous Harm contrary to section 222(a) of the Penal Code, reproduced hereinabove, provides for the maximum sentence of life imprisonment, but the minimum sentence is not stated, it depends on the facts of each case and the discretion of the Court which must be exercised judiciously. See the case of Bahati John vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 114 of 2019) [2022] TZCA 407 (11 July 2022). Moreover, in sentencing the accused the Court must assess and consider, among other factors, the level of seriousness of the offence committed by the accused. According to the Tanzania Sentencing Guidelines, 2023 the Court is required to look at the nature and circumstances of the offence, the offender, and the victim to assess the following: '(a) the gravity of the offence - nature and circumstances in which the offence was committed; (b) the culpability of the particular offender - the motivation, conduct, intention, and particular circumstances of the offender; and (c) the nature and extent of harm, injury or damage that was caused, intended or might foreseeabiy have been caused to the victim or society This Court, after considering both aggravating and mitigating factors stated herein above together with the gravity of the offence, culpability of the accused and nature and extent of the damage places the offence committed by the accused in the category of high level of'Acts Intended to 6 Cause Grievous Harm' drawing inspiration from the guidance provided in the Tanzania Sentencing Guidelines, 2023. In light of the guidelines, if the offence attracts life imprisonment as a maximum punishment, the custodial sentence of the offence considered to be of a high level by the Court should be between ten (10) years to life imprisonment. Under the circumstances of this case, the custodial term of the sentence would have been 12 years of imprisonment if the case had been contested at the trial. However, the Court considers the fact that the accused confessed to the police after committing the offence. The accused also pleaded guilty at the second opportunity in Court when the matter was set for a full trial. Thus, the twelve (12) years that the Court considered imposing on the convict are reduced by three years. After the said reduction, nine (09) years of imprisonment remain. The Court of Appeal cases of Charles Mashimba v. Republic [2005] TLR 90, Swalehe Ndungajilungu v. Republic [2005] TLR 94 and Bernadeta Paul v. Republic (1992) TLR 97 are relevant. The Court also considers other aggravating and mitigating factors, including the the circumstances under which the offence was committed that is the accused was in an altercation with a third party, and the fact that all persons involved including the accused and the victim were at a bar drinking alcohol. Therefore, by considering the accused's personal circumstances (that is unstable health condition and his family's status) and circumstances under which the offence was committed as expounded above, the remaining nine (09) years are reduced further by two (02) years and five (05) months and 7 therefore, six (6) years and seven (07) months of anticipated imprisonment remain. The Court also takes into account the time spent by the accused in remand since his arrest on 24/09/2023 to date (26/03/2025) which is more than one (01) year and six (06) months. Hence, the remaining six (6) years and seven (07) months are thus reduced by one year and six months being the time spent in remand by the accused since his arrest (see the case of Swalehe Ndungajilungu v. Republic [2005] TLR 94. After the said reduction five (05) years and one (01) month remain. Therefore, this Court sentences the accused to serve five (05) years and one (01) month of imprisonment from the date of this order. Moreover, in terms of sections 25 and 31 of the Penal Code and section 348(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, Cap. 20 R.E. 2022, the accused shall pay the victim, Silaus Odira@ Kuni, a compensation of Tanzania Shillings Two Million Only (TZS 2,000,000/=) for the lethal injuries suffered. It is so ordered. Right of appeal explained. K. I. Kafanabo Judge 26/03/2025 8 The ruling was delivered today in the presence of Ms. Martha Mbosoli, State Attorney, representing the Republic, and in the presence of Ms. Mary 9